Author
Topic: upgrading to full frame + seeking suggestions on what to replace 60mm macro with (Read 3219 times)

I am fairly new to Canon Rumors but wanted some guidance from those shooters who upgraded from APS-C to Full Frame and what full frame macro lens they went with if they were shooting with the 60mm APS-C macro. I have the 60d and used the 60mm macro for closeups the last 18 months. The type of closeups I shot with the 60mm are babies feet, flowers, engagement rings/wedding ring type shots, and documents.

I plan to upgrade from the 60d to the 6d (or whatever the entry level full frame is called when it comes out) so I'll likely be getting rid of the 60mm since it's an ef-s. I know the 100mm 2.8 is l macro would be best lens to go with on the full frame and that I've basically been shooting with a 100mm since the 60mm x 1.6 is 96mm equivalent. However, I think I'll get the 17-40l (one of the reasons I am upgrading to ff is to get true wide angle / noncropped wide angle shots) first so the 100mm l isnt in my budget. Therefore I'm considering the 50mm f2.5 macro (mainly because of it's great price of $279) or regular 100mm macro.

Questions:

1.) I've seen a few reviews that mention that the af on the 50mm macro is noisy...but is it so noisy/loud that it would disturb a quiet baby?

2.) What has been the experience of shooters using the 50mm on a APS-C body (just in case I end up keeping the 60d)? On an APS-C the 50mm could serve as an 80mm equivalent when needed.

3.) What full frame macro lens did you select for full frame when upgrading from APS-C to full frame and why?

4.) If you have both the 50mm macro and 100mm macro do you find that you use them equally and for what kinds of shooting? (I'm thinking that the only shot I would use the 50mm macro for is documents).

If you can survive without the IS, then non-L 100mm macro is IQ wise similar to the L version and cheaper too. It also gives you 1:1 macro, while as far as I know for the 50mm you need a life size converter to get 1:1 (I might be wrong though) which will cost some more money.

Maybe I shouldnt use macro and closeup interchangeably. I have the 50mm 1.8 and that is good for closeups (portraits, walk around, etc) but doesnt have a short enough minimum focusing distance to say photograph a 3"x5" index card "closeup". I can photograph an index card or piece of paper with the 60mm but find myself having to step back or hover at an akward angle sometimes - thus my pondering the 50mm on a ff. If that makes sense.....

briansquibb

Maybe I shouldnt use macro and closeup interchangeably. I have the 50mm 1.8 and that is good for closeups (portraits, walk around, etc) but doesnt have a short enough minimum focusing distance to say photograph a 3"x5" index card "closeup". I can photograph an index card or piece of paper with the 60mm but find myself having to step back or hover at an akward angle sometimes - thus my pondering the 50mm on a ff. If that makes sense.....

I had a 14 to 40L and was not happy with iq. IMHO, get a better quality lens.

Assume you mean 17-40.

Needs stopping down to f/8 where it dies give a good IQ

Except in the corners if you're shooting landscapes, where it can get pretty soft. I would also suggest the 100mm macro as a replacement for the 60mm macro, but also consider the Sigma 105mm macro and Tamron 90mm macro. However, neither of those lenses have full time manual focusing and use a clutch mechanism to switch between manual and AF. I think the front element also extands, unlike the Canon 100mm.

I must say that Canon makes no good wide angle zooms and both 14LII and TSE17 does not support filters! I use the 16-35mm L II and its corner IQ is horrible makes me think of the Nikon 14-24 G everytime I zoom in. My friend purposefully has it on his Canon body even if it meant manual focus sigh....

Anyway, put that aside, I personally have the 100L marco and it works great, you won't find it disappointing but the ultimate macro lens in my opinion would go to the 180L marco, that lens is totally a macro killer. If you don't want to get a specific lens I guess close up filter on a telephoto zoom say 70-200mm II would work fine I guess. Or extension tubes on shorter focal length lenses...

You will be pleased with any macro lens, all of them are sharp and excellent. Since fast autofocus is not needed for macro, this is one area where a third party lens can save you money.The Sigma 105mm Macro is excellent and available at a fair price.

I must say that Canon makes no good wide angle zooms and both 14LII and TSE17 does not support filters! I use the 16-35mm L II and its corner IQ is horrible makes me think of the Nikon 14-24 G everytime I zoom in. My friend purposefully has it on his Canon body even if it meant manual focus sigh....

Anyway, put that aside, I personally have the 100L marco and it works great, you won't find it disappointing but the ultimate macro lens in my opinion would go to the 180L marco, that lens is totally a macro killer. If you don't want to get a specific lens I guess close up filter on a telephoto zoom say 70-200mm II would work fine I guess. Or extension tubes on shorter focal length lenses...